Legal Opinion
Thomas Garner; and Cammi Garner v. The Cincinnati Insurance Company
District Court, D. Utah
Decided November 5, 2025No. 2:24-cv-00378Unknown
1Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION THOMAS GARNER; and CAMMI MEMORANDUM DECISION AND GARNER, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SANCTIONS (DOC. NO. 55) Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 2:24-cv-00378 THE CINCINNATI INSURANCE District Judge Tena Campbell COMPANY, Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg Defendant. Thomas and Cammi Garner initiated this action after Cincinnati Insurance Company denied their insurance claim for injuries sustained in a car accident.1 Arguing Cincinnati violated a scheduling order and engaged in “repeated discovery abuses,” the Garners move for sanctions.2…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Lee v. Max Intern., LLCCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2011
- Dreith v. Nu Image, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Chavez v. City of AlbuquerqueCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2005
- HCG Platinum, LLC v. Preferred Product Placement Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017
- Oklahoma Federated Gold and Numismatics, Inc. v. Michael W. BlodgettCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1994
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.